Runner
Group: Members
Posts: 2,526
Joined: 9-April 06
From: McGuire AFB, NJ
Member No.: 8,445
|
As the Emergence thread was derailed by the rules debate on the matrix rules and then needed to have Moderator intervention, I decided that this important debate, in my eyes, needed it's own thread to continue. For the this first post, I will be quoting posts from the Emergence thread, hopefully continuing the debate in a less derailing manner.
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Jun 21 2007, 06:11 PM) | Perhaps I didn't manage to make my point clear:
As it is now, the matrix rules have serious bugs that make them pretty much near unusable in normal play without heavy handwaving.
Thus, playing a matrix centered campaing without debugging the first in one way or another seems a bad thing to do. |
| QUOTE (synner @ Jun 22 2007, 05:48 AM) | | QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Jun 21 2007, 07:20 PM) | | Again, this is just the way the matrix works by RAW. |
This is the way the Matrix works under the basic rules and the basic rules are just that. You are making the erroneous assumption that they reflect global picture.
For simplicity, space, and ease of play, the core book simply assumes the nodes people will be hacking (using the basic rules) work on the same principles and rules as personal commlinks - just like it assumes basic level players don't want to jump right in with multilayer and dual-key encryption when they're just getting the hang of the rules. This need not be the case with the advanced rules and these need not contradict any of the existing rules, just expand upon them.
The restrictions and limitations of commlinks and small networks will undoubtedly be different from those of servers, networks, and distributed grids. The advanced rules covering these will be introducing in Unwired.
And now back to your regular broadcast.
|
| QUOTE (Moon-Hawk) | | QUOTE (Synner) | For simplicity the core book assumes the nodes people will be hacking using the basic rules work on the same principles and rules as personal commlinks - this need not be the case with the advanced rules.
The restrictions and limitations of commlinks and small networks will undoubtedly be different from those of servers, networks, and distributed grids. The advanced rules covering these will be introducing in Unwired. |
This incites me to post.
But we're playing now, and would like a working system now. You're defending the basic rules with imaginary advanced rules. They may exist for you, but they don't exist for us, and will not until Unwired is released.
It's not that servers don't make sense in only the basic rules, it's that they don't make sense in the only rules that exist.
If one person can't figure out the matrix it's probably because they're an idiot. If many people can't figure out the matrix it's probably not because the rules are perfect and they're all idiots.
I don't mean to come off as overly negative, overall I like SR4 and I can't wait until Unwired comes out and answers all these questions. I certainly understand why there aren't rules for unusual systems. But a server: any host capable of connecting to more than 12 things at a time, is so integral and fundamental to the game that I can not fathom how the "advanced" rules for making a simple host function haven't at least appeared in a FAQ as an "Oops, I can't believe we left this out of the core book, here's the rule for hosts until Unwired comes out." Or perhaps a "No, no, that's not what a subscription list means at all, it actually means..." Or a line in errata that says "The System x 2 limit does not apply to large servers. Nevermind how they work, we'll address that in Unwired, but rest assured that megacorporate hosts aren't run off someone's commlink, so the limit doesn't apply"
|
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
| QUOTE (Synner) |
This is the way the Matrix works under the basic rules and the basic rules are just that. You are making the erroneous assumption that they reflect global picture. |
It's hardly my error to go along with the published rules - which lack the disclaimer 'Only good for small networks'.
|
| QUOTE (synner) | No, IMHO your error was in assuming advanced rules would not nuance the existing basic rules or that the existing rules were the full extent of the rules.
The basic book has magic working the same all over the world, but when you pick up Street Magic you discover (and knew going in) that in certain places magic works better and in some places magic works worse. The basic book did not introduce background count though it fundamentally affects the way magic works.
Good advanced rules are perfect plug-ins. They are fully compatible and they do not contradict existing rules but rather expand and extrapolate from them. |
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) | | QUOTE (synner) |
The restrictions and limitations of commlinks and small networks will undoubtedly be different from those of servers, networks, and distributed grids. The advanced rules covering these will be introducing in Unwired. |
So basically, you state that hacking into any real corporate network/browsing the matrix requires the extended rules as the basic rules never intedned to cover it - so let's wait until the last book of the current publishing cycle appears.
|
| QUOTE (synner) | Actually I did not state that. I never stated that the "basic rules were never intended to cover it". The basic rules are intended to cover it. What I said is that they're basic rules, they're intended to be accessible, easy to use, and keep things simple. The basic rules don't cover "small networks" they cover pretty much any decentralized secure networking grid.
Want to hack a wifi security network of cameras and alarms, the basic rules work. Want to hack a night club system, basic rules work (just daisy chain two or three networks). Want to hack an office system during an intrusion, the basic rules work. Want to hack a security rigger's network with a half dozen perimeter drones, the basic rules work. Want to reproduce a local corporate server but are having problems with the limit on subscriptions, make the node a server hub connected to the server rather than the server itself, the basic rules work.
Does this mean the basic rules are perfect and complete? No. Do they hold up well on the high-end? No. Does everything make sense if you assume they are the be all and end all of rules? No.
They are intended to reflect hacking as used by shadowrunners while shadowrunning. They are meant to be quick and simple.
Want to hack the UCAS Government system, slipping in through the Seattle Metroplex Administration network by accessing the ACHE's local environmental control system, things start to get complicated but you can still use the basic rules.
Want to duplicate 10 thousand copies of your favorite combat agent and wage e-war on Renraku, the basic rules are not so good but still doable (if you don't mind making that number of rolls for both sides).
What the basic rules are not meant to do is cover all the nuances and all the angles (heck, not even advanced rules do that). To use the analogy above technically the basic Magic rules don't even cover a magician casting a spell in parts of the Barrens and yet they function and do their job (with a little "hand-waving" as you put it) or playing a houngan.
And yes, if you can't make do with the basic rules, if you're the type of gamer who prefers to play all the nuances and wants all the details of the Matrix then Unwired is for you. Just like Street Magic was essential for anyone wanting to play any possession tradition or use background count as an element of the game.
While your personal preference might be a higher priority for Unwired (and everyone is entitled to an opinion), making it the last of the core books to be released is simply good business sense and good development. No matter what importance we want to give the Matrix2.0, realistically there's only so many books that can be produced at a time, there are books that have wider target audiences, and there is the need to make sure that when something like Unwired is done it is done right.
Furthermore we knew from the get go that we intended to expand on technomancers and the other things before we got to Unwired. We knew Unwired, unlike the other core books, would involve very little updating of old material. We knew Unwired was going to take more work than most of the other core books put together. And we knew that Unwired needed to be as complete as possible So the simple answer is that Unwired will be the last book in the current production cycle exactly because because all the elements and concepts we want to cover need to be in place.
Unwired is under development and this is the last comment I'll make on that book until primary writing is wrapped. Back to Emergence. |
| QUOTE (FrankTrollMan) | Serbitar has more priviledged information on this than some, but I agree that his tactics are unhelpful.
---
The deal with the Matrix stuff currently published is that it is contradictory. It is an opinion-laden value judgement to say that any of the ideas presented are good or bad, but it is merely factual to state that they are incompatible. You seriously must ignore portions of the basic book simply to follow other portions of the basic book. To that extent, those who maintain that the system cannot be played without using handwaving technologies are completely correct.
However, asking it to come out quickly is honestly what got us into this mess in the first place. Even the basic mechanics of whether hacking into a node is performed by rolling Logic + Hacking (as stated on pages 124 and 223) or Exploit + Hacking (as stated on pages 221 and another part of 223) is completely up in the air. That's a really fundamental question and it's answered positively in incompatible ways in two different parts of the main book.
What Serbitar is referring to is the mandate that Shadowrun Developement has set for themselves to not contradict the Basic Book in Supplementary Rules Material. That's a laudable goal in general of course, but in this specific instance the basic book includes both A and ~A as definitive statements. This means that really anything you say is going to contradict something in the Basic Book, leaving the devs the option only to fail in the mission they have set for themselves or to be deliberately deceitful.
Game Companies have a strong tendency to err towards the latter choice unfortunately. Many times Andy Collins and those lovable scamps at WotC will issue a hedged statement that is so wishy-washy and unclear that it is supposed to jive with two incompatible statements in the rules so that they can claim that they somehow aren't contradicting anything that the rules say. This is certainly a danger with Unwired as well. It is certainly possible that the authors will pull a D20 or a White Wolf and make a book that is incomprehensible and contradictory so that they can claim that they aren't contradicting any currently existing rules (even though those rtules contradict themselves). It's possible of course that they'll show some nuts and come clean with the viewers and write something that cuts the bullshit and moves on - I'm betting on something in between that fixes some problems and leaves some others untouched.
--
Serbitar can be forgiven his skepticism, since Unwired is an awful long time in coming out and Peter won't admit publically that there are problems that need to be fixed (of course he won't, that's his job - he's supposed to spin things as positively as he can). Honestly, I can't say that he's wrong to hold that view.
Here are some things that need to be fixed in Unwired (off the top of my head):
Agent Smith (There is no meaningful upper limit on how much assistance you can levy out of duplicates of agent programs running on various nodes).
Hacker Dicepools (Logic and Programs should both be important, as is one or the other is useless depending upon which part of the book you believe).
Servers, Matrix Cafes, and Hubs (Subscription limits are way too low to have any meaningful matrix society, the limits written for drone rigs simply don't allow for libraries or shopping catalogues to exist).
And Peter's statements about how there is no problem - geared to reduce panic amongst those less familiar with the game - actually cause panic among those who definitely know about these problems. Quite hilarious that.
But take a step back for a moment: of course Peter knows about these issues. He fucking well editted Street Magic. And while there are some fubars that fell through the cracks (Aspected Magicians and Blood Spirits), the book on the whole is very high quality and addressed a lot of the issues people had with the magic system of 4th edition. There is no way in hell that he's going to come out publically and say "Yeah, the rules don't actually say that there's any meaningful limit on how many piratted agents you can have in alternate nodes running continuous Medic commands on duplicates of your icon accessing different nodes, thus allowing you to regenerate your entire matrix condition bar every combat turn. There's no listed flavor reason why that wouldn't work either. Oops." - one can be certain that he actually has had his attention drawn to this fact.
-Frank |
|
Matrix Rules Debate, What's your take on the matrix rules?
Jun 22 2007, 02:09 AM
Konsaki Matrix Rules Debate Jun 22 2007, 02:09 AM
